Does anyone know more about this claim? Can narrow down the identity intended? Refute the claim?

"(his great-great-grandmother was a Jewish maid)." Is from the Weekly World News which has no evidence to support this ridiculous claim, and no his great-great grandmother was not Jewish.

As regards to his paternal grandfather, there are certainly rumours saying he was Jewish but these have been proven to be false.

The third possibility is that Adolf Hitler's grandfather was Jewish. Rumours to that effect circulated in Munich cafes in the early 1920s, and were fostered by sensationalist journalism of the foreign press during the 1930s. It was suggested that the name `Huttler' was Jewish, `revealed' that he could be traced to a Jewish family called Hitler in Bucharest, and even claimed that his father had been sired by Baron Rothschild, in whose house in Vienna his grandmother had allegedly spent some time as a servant. But the most serious speculation about Hitler's supposed Jewish background has occurred since the Second World War, and is directly traceable to the memoirs of the leading Nazi lawyer and Governor General of Poland, Hans Frank, dictated in his Nuremberg cell while awaiting the hangman.

Frank claimed that he had been called in by Hitler towards the end of 1930 and shown a letter from his nephew William Patrick Hitler (the son of his half-brother Alois, who had been briefly married to an Irish woman) threatening, in connection with the press stories circulating about Hitler's background, to expose the fact that Hitler had Jewish blood flowing in his veins. Allegedly commissioned by Hitler to look into his family history, Frank reportedly discovered that Maria Anna Schicklgruber had given birth to her child while serving as a cook in the home of a Jewish family called Frankenberger in Graz. Not only that: Frankenberger senior had reputedly paid regular instalments to support the child on behalf of his son, around nineteen years old at the birth, until the child's fourteenth birthday. Letters were allegedly exchanged for years between Maria Anna Schicklgruber and the Frankenbergers. According to Frank, Hitler declared that he knew, from what his father and grandmother had said, that his grandfather was not the Jew from Graz, but because his grandmother and her subsequent husband were so poor they had conned the Jew into believing he was the father and into paying for the boy's support.

Frank's story gained wide circulation in the 1950s. But it simply does not stand up. There was no Jewish family called Frankenberger in Graz during the 1830s. In fact, there were no Jews at all in the whole of Styria at the time, since Jews were not permitted in that part of Austria until the 1860s. A family named Frankenreiter did live there, but was not Jewish. There is no evidence that Maria Anna was ever in Graz, let alone was employed by the butcher Leopold Frankenreiter. No correspondence between Maria Anna and a family called Frankenberg or Frankenreiter has ever turned up. The son of Leopold Frankenreiter and alleged father of the baby (according to Frank's story and accepting that he had merely confused names) for whom Frankenreiter was seemingly prepared to pay child support for thirteen years was ten years old at the time of Alois's birth. The Frankenreiter family had moreover hit upon such hard times that payment of any support to Maria Anna Schicklgruber would have been inconceivable. Equally lacking in credibility is Frank's comment that Hitler had learnt from his grandmother that there was no truth in the Graz story: his grandmother had been dead for over forty years at the time of Hitler's birth. And whether in fact Hitler received a blackmail letter from his nephew in 1930 is also doubtful. If such was the case, then Patrick -- who repeatedly made a nuisance of himself by scrounging from his famous uncle -- was lucky to survive the next few years which he spent for the most part in Germany, and to be able to leave the country for good in December 1938. His `revelations', when they came in a Paris journal in August 1939, contained nothing about the Graz story. Nor did a number of different Gestapo inquiries into Hitler's family background in the 1930s and 1940s contain any reference to the alleged Graz background. Indeed they discovered no new skeletons in the cupboard. Hans Frank's memoirs, dictated at a time when he was waiting for the hangman and plainly undergoing a psychological crisis, are full of inaccuracies and have to be used with caution. With regard to the story of Hitler's alleged Jewish grandfather, they are valueless. Hitler's grandfather, whoever he was, was not a Jew from Graz.

So there you have it, his family did have incest —(his parents were first cousins once removed)— but his ancestry was not at all Jewish.

NUFCToon

05-13-2012 03:47 PM

His great great grandmother was Maria Anna Neugeschwandter and she was just an Austrian German like the rest of his family.

Farmer Jane

05-13-2012 03:52 PM

The short answer the same as the long one -no. You're either Jewish or you aren't. You can't be a half-Jewish or a quarter or a sixteenth. You are or you aren't. Clearly he wasn't. And even if a grandmother on the maternal side were Jewish, there isn't a Jewish person I know who would accept him as such. That whole Jesus thing is a deal-breaker.

Exapno Mapcase

05-13-2012 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NUFCToon
(Post 15058204)

So there you have it, his family did have incest —(his parents were first cousins once removed)— but his ancestry was not at all Jewish.

A mild nitpick, or more accurately a pet peeve.

It's true that the majority of states in the U.S. ban marriage between first cousins. But that means that 19 states do not. And we're alone in this among developed nations. And even if that weren't true, I'm not sure that first cousins once removed would qualify since that is a more distant relationship.

Incest is defined culturally or religiously. It has no fixed meaning. Insofar as it does have a cultural meaning, it's one of "badness" because of either revulsion about being brought up in the same household or about the chances of harm to the children, and neither of those have much place being applied to first cousins, let alone first cousins once removed.

John W. Kennedy

05-13-2012 10:49 PM

Yeah, I’ve had to put up this caveat about first cousins about half a dozen times on Facebook and in real life this last week, mostly because of North Carolina.

Powers

05-14-2012 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Farmer Jane
(Post 15060231)

The short answer the same as the long one -no. You're either Jewish or you aren't. You can't be a half-Jewish or a quarter or a sixteenth. You are or you aren't. Clearly he wasn't. And even if a grandmother on the maternal side were Jewish, there isn't a Jewish person I know who would accept him as such. That whole Jesus thing is a deal-breaker.

Jewishness is an ethnicity as well as a religion, isn't it? Why would the rules for measuring quantity of Jewish ancestry be any different than for any other ethnicity?

Powers &8^]

gamerunknown

05-14-2012 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Powers

Why would the rules for measuring quantity of Jewish ancestry be any different than for any other ethnicity?

By convention and for certain purposes, Judaism uses matrilineal descent. Not quite what you were getting at I assume though.

Malthus

05-14-2012 04:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Powers
(Post 15063856)

Jewishness is an ethnicity as well as a religion, isn't it? Why would the rules for measuring quantity of Jewish ancestry be any different than for any other ethnicity?

Powers &8^]

Depends on who and for what purpose.

Ethnicity has, as far as I know, no firm "rules" - being a social construct. For example, in some places and cultures people create an elaborate system concerning how "Black" one is ("mulatto, quadroon, and octoroon"); in others, any amount of visible "Black" ancestry is sufficient to make one "Black", with only the single category. Neither is objectively right or wrong as to who is "Black".

That's an ethnicity that is socially-constructed around skin colour. Judaism is an ethnicity that is socially-constructed around tribal identity. Within Judaism, you are either a member of the tribe or you are not. There are two ways to gain membership - by birth or by conversion - and equally, conversion out of Judaism to another religion incompatible with Judaism makes you lose membership, according to most Jews.

Thus, as far as Jews are concerned, Judaism is binary; non-Jews may, for their own purposes, create a more elaborate characterization.

Irishman

05-14-2012 05:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Farmer Jane
(Post 15060231)

The short answer the same as the long one -no. You're either Jewish or you aren't. You can't be a half-Jewish or a quarter or a sixteenth. You are or you aren't.

You're conflating ethnically Jewish with religiously Jewish. While the two are interrelated, it is possible to be ethnically Jewish but reject Judaism as a practice, and be fully atheist, or pick another religion. And it is possible to be non-ethnically Jewish but elect to become religiously Jewish.

The question is not whether Hitler practiced Judaism, the question is with regards to his ethnicity.

And it appears all evidence points to "not ethnically Jewish".

Malthus

05-14-2012 06:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Irishman
(Post 15064095)

You're conflating ethnically Jewish with religiously Jewish. While the two are interrelated, it is possible to be ethnically Jewish but reject Judaism as a practice, and be fully atheist, or pick another religion. And it is possible to be non-ethnically Jewish but elect to become religiously Jewish.

The question is not whether Hitler practiced Judaism, the question is with regards to his ethnicity.

And it appears all evidence points to "not ethnically Jewish".

As far as Judaism, religious or not, are concerned, you can be a Jewish atheist, but not a Jewish Christian.

That's because Judaism is an ethnic identity that is built around tribalism, which can be thought of as a sort of non-localized nationality.

If you are born American you stay American, right up to the point you officially change your nationality to (say) Canadian. At that point, you are not a Canadian American, but fully Canadian and not American. You may have been "born American" but you are "now Canadian".

Thus, within Judaism itself as an ethnicity you can't be "half Jewish" or "quarter Jewish", any more that you can be "quarter American, three-quarters Canadian" by nationality. You are either one or the other.

Farmer Jane

05-14-2012 07:49 PM

I'm not conflating ethnically Jewish and religiously Jewish. I know exactly what I'm saying. You're either Jewish or you aren't.

And he wasn't.

qazwart

05-14-2012 09:25 PM

Does it really matter whether Hitler had some Jewish ancestor or not? Does it change what the man did? Does it change the devastation and destruction he caused?

Judaism is a religion. Like many religions, it sometimes recognizes members who are rather lapsed in their practice, and even will claim their children as members. But, in the end, it is just a system of beliefs. If everyone who was matrilineally descended from a Jew was actually Jewish, there would be a lot more than the 12 or so million Jews around today.

Until quite recently, no Jewish authority would question anyone who claimed to be Jewish. If you said you were, that was good enough. No one bothered to check birth records. It was simply assumed that if you claimed to be Jewish, you were either insane, a glutton for punishment, or Jewish.

What made being Jewish an ethnicity were those outside of Judaism. To these people, you can't be Jewish and whatever their ethnicity was. These people made the special laws that kept Jews in their place. They forced Jews to live in certain areas and prevented Jews from holding certain jobs. They made Jews were special clothes and pay special taxes. Hitler merely took the tradition to its logical conclusion.

I am almost 100% German/Austrian by ethnicity. My family can trace their root to Vienna and to Western Germany all the way back to the 14th century before the idea of what was France and what was Germany were firmly established. German Jews, like many Germans were very proud of their German roots. They spoke German, and even had proper German names. Yet, in 1936, these deep German roots would have done nothing to save them.

My Father-in-law's family lived in Iraq for over 2000 years. His family spoke Iraqi Arabic, dressed like other Iraqis, and participated in their culture. They even had Arabic names. To anyone outside of Iraq, my Father-in-law's family would be just another Arab Iraqi family. However, to Arab nationalists of the first half of the 20th century, he was not an Iraqi, but a Jew -- a foreigner. It didn't matter that his Iraqi roots probably stretch farther back then any of theirs. He was a Jew. In 1952, his family was forced to flee Iraq, leaving behind all property and possessions.

Ethnicity is a social construct. What made someone Black in the U.S.? That was set by the various state laws, and could be arbitrated in court. Some states even had special courts to determine ethnicity. In Louisiana, it was officially 1/16 Negro blood. If you had that, you better make sure you walked the right way down the sidewalk and didn't drink from the wrong water fountains. Before 1865, you could even become the legal property of another person. Twain's story Puddin' Head Wilson showed how much race was a social construct.

I always get the feeling that this Was Hitler Jewish? question is somehow going to be detrimental to us Jews. You have people like the OP protesting that their Hitler was completely German and thus couldn't be tainted with Jewish blood -- as if those were incompatible. But, what is the other side trying to prove by claiming Hitler had some Jewish ancestry? See, that's why Hitler was evil! Deep down, he was Jewish!.

Hitler claimed he wasn't Jewish, and that's good enough to make him not Jewish. And, as a Jew, I wouldn't want him anyway. The OP can have him.

Mike Kelly, a columnist for the Austin Statesman, once wrote about a book he read where the author claimed that Jesus had children, and those children became the royalty of Europe. Kelly mused that he could imagine someone tracing his family tree all the way back to Jesus, then getting kicked out of his country club for having Jewish ancestry.

Malthus

05-15-2012 09:30 AM

Naw, I think the reason the "was Hitler Jewish" question pops up is because people love pat irony. It's more a 'isn't it funny that Hitler really was what he purported to hate?' issue, than a 'Hilter got his evil from the Jews' issue.

The real irony, of course, is that the Jews Hilter hated were in many cases good self-identifying Germans - many a German who had fought with distinction in WW1 ended up in the death camps; more significantly, many a German scientist, vital for the war effort, was either killed or driven to work for Germany's enemies. Hitler 'was one of whom he hated', not because he was Jewish, but because so many Jews he persecuted were German ...

gamerunknown

05-15-2012 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malthus

You are either one or the other.

Well, I hold passports for three different countries and often find myself using affiliative language when referring to a country I don't reside in ("we could do with more Democrats in Congress" or a similar sentiment). Not belonging exclusively to any one nation has made me suspicious of patriotism. I feel camaraderie with humans in general.

Malthus

05-15-2012 10:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gamerunknown
(Post 15066057)

Well, I hold passports for three different countries and often find myself using affiliative language when referring to a country I don't reside in ("we could do with more Democrats in Congress" or a similar sentiment). Not belonging exclusively to any one nation has made me suspicious of patriotism. I feel camaraderie with humans in general.

That's nice, but it has nothing to do with the issue. Some countries do not allow for multiple citizenship. It isn't a question of what is desirable, but of what the particular rules for holding that particular identity are. The rules as far as Jews are concerned are that you are either a Jew or not - and this goes for non-religious Jews as much as for religious ones.

If you are arguing that having national or tribal identities is overall a bad thing, I'd perhaps agree - but this argument is about what a particular tribal identity *is*. The argument is not affected by whether or not having such identities is good or bad.

gamerunknown

05-15-2012 10:46 AM

I'm just pointing out that using "nationality" as an analogue for a discrete trait may not be ideal.

Malthus

05-15-2012 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gamerunknown
(Post 15066303)

I'm just pointing out that using "nationality" as an analogue for a discrete trait may not be ideal.

No analogy is perfect, but this one seems to work- some countries prohibit dual or multiple citizenship; others do not. Similarly, some ethnic identies allow for subdivisions and percentages, and others do not. If you are a citizen of one of the countries which prohibits multiple citizenship, you can't really claim that status, since the rules don't allow for it to exist.

Judaism is one that doesn't allow people to be half-Jewish. Within Judaism itself, that is. You are either Jewish, or you are a non-Jew with some Jewish ancestry.

You gain Jewish status by either birth or conversion (Judaism is generally matrilineal, so in most varieties of Judaism you gain Jewish status by having a Jewish mother); you lose Jewish status by conversion to a religion that is incompatible with Judaism (you can probably be a Jewish Buddhist of the philosophical school, but not a Jewish Christian).

NUFCToon

05-15-2012 12:10 PM

According to new DNA results and genetic evidence, the Jews are a race not just an ethno-religious group.

Meh. Certain Jewish groups have been genetically isolated - most notably, some Ashkenazim from Eastern Europe. But those Jews are no more a "race" than Newfoundlanders.

Jews cannot be a "race", because there are many Jewish groups who are quite obviously more different from other Jews than they are compared to the people around them.

For example, no-one would deny that Eastern European Ashkenazim generally have white skin ... but the Beta Israel (sometimes known as "Falashas" though the term is derogatory) are also "Jews" and they have Black skin. It's an odd sort of "race" in which some members of the "race" have white skin, and others black.

One might point out at this point, however, that, whether or not Hitler counts as Jewish, it would still be interesting if (just speaking hypothetically) it were to be demonstrated that, say, his father was Jewish. Judaism may have the right to say who and who is not a Jew, but it doesn’t have the right to say who has Jewish ancestors.

Malthus

05-15-2012 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John W. Kennedy
(Post 15067139)

One might point out at this point, however, that, whether or not Hitler counts as Jewish, it would still be interesting if (just speaking hypothetically) it were to be demonstrated that, say, his father was Jewish. Judaism may have the right to say who and who is not a Jew, but it doesn’t have the right to say who has Jewish ancestors.

It would be interesting in an ain't-that-ironical way, or perhaps shed some sort of psychological light on his later hatreds if he knew about it ... as you say, hypothetically. That would perhaps indicate a real whopper of an oedipal complex! :D

Irishman

05-15-2012 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by qazwart
(Post 15064839)

Does it really matter whether Hitler had some Jewish ancestor or not? Does it change what the man did? Does it change the devastation and destruction he caused?

From the state of who he was, what he did, no it doesn't really matter. It's merely a question of interest for amusement.

Quote:

I always get the feeling that this Was Hitler Jewish? question is somehow going to be detrimental to us Jews. You have people like the OP protesting that their Hitler was completely German and thus couldn't be tainted with Jewish blood -- as if those were incompatible.

Pay closer attention. I am the OP of this thread, and I make no such things. You are referring to the other thread I cited as inspiration.

Quote:

But, what is the other side trying to prove by claiming Hitler had some Jewish ancestry? See, that's why Hitler was evil! Deep down, he was Jewish!.

Not at all. It's merely the irony factor. "Wow, Hitler led a pogram to eradicate Jews when, technically, he should have been included. Hee hee." Nothing judgmental about Jews at all.

Quote:

Hitler claimed he wasn't Jewish, and that's good enough to make him not Jewish. And, as a Jew, I wouldn't want him anyway. The OP can have him.

I don't want him.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malthus
(Post 15066342)

Judaism is one that doesn't allow people to be half-Jewish. Within Judaism itself, that is. You are either Jewish, or you are a non-Jew with some Jewish ancestry.

Interesting that you just used Jew and Jewish in two different manners in the same sentence, and yet you are precluding me from making the same distinction. Surely you see the error there?

"Currently being a Jew" may be a tribal issue that is a yes or no block, in the same way that a person is yes/no a Christian, yes/no an atheist, yes/no a whatever. But you cannot dismiss a persons heritage and lineage with a simple yes/no.

It's like a friend of mine. Her grandmother was a Japanese lady who came to America with her American husband around WWII. My friend has 1/4 Japanese heritage. Culturally, she is an American, with little Japanese influence. Physically, she retains some Japanese appearance - long black hair, some Japanese facial features. She also has freckles. It would be wrong to call her Japanese, as if she were from Japan or had Japanese culture. She's far more likely to eat Taco Bell than sushi. But her heritage is Japanese, and that cannot be dismissed simply because she's never been Japan.

Similarly, a person who has a Jewish father and non-Jewish mother, still is "Jewish" in heritage, despite not currently being a member of the tribe.

Quote:

As far as Judaism, religious or not, are concerned, you can be a Jewish atheist, but not a Jewish Christian.

What about "Jews for Jesus"? Yeah, Judaism rejects them as Jewish, even though they themselves claim Jewish status.

Malthus

05-15-2012 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Irishman
(Post 15067503)

Interesting that you just used Jew and Jewish in two different manners in the same sentence, and yet you are precluding me from making the same distinction. Surely you see the error there?

There is no "error". You are either Jewish or not. Them's the rulez.

The issue is not whether "Hitler was Jewish", it is whether "Hitler had some Jewish ancestry". There's a big difference between those two.

Quote:

"Currently being a Jew" may be a tribal issue that is a yes or no block, in the same way that a person is yes/no a Christian, yes/no an atheist, yes/no a whatever. But you cannot dismiss a persons heritage and lineage with a simple yes/no.

It's like a friend of mine. Her grandmother was a Japanese lady who came to America with her American husband around WWII. My friend has 1/4 Japanese heritage. Culturally, she is an American, with little Japanese influence. Physically, she retains some Japanese appearance - long black hair, some Japanese facial features. She also has freckles. It would be wrong to call her Japanese, as if she were from Japan or had Japanese culture. She's far more likely to eat Taco Bell than sushi. But her heritage is Japanese, and that cannot be dismissed simply because she's never been Japan.

Similarly, a person who has a Jewish father and non-Jewish mother, still is "Jewish" in heritage, despite not currently being a member of the tribe.

They have some Jewish ancestry.

As noted, we aren't really disagreeing all that much. Sure, it is potentially possible (hypothetically) that Hitler had some percentage of Jewish ancestry. But he certainly was not "Jewish" - he was a (presumably, lapsed) Catholic (allegedly at one point in his boyhood he considered becomming a priest), which would preclude him being "Jewish" (unless he converted - I suppose that's pretty unlikely ... :D . )

Quote:

What about "Jews for Jesus"? Yeah, Judaism rejects them as Jewish, even though they themselves claim Jewish status.

That's an easy one - they are what we call "Christians". It's like having a group called "Atheists for Godliness". :D

Irishman

05-15-2012 05:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malthus
(Post 15067598)

The issue is not whether "Hitler was Jewish", it is whether "Hitler had some Jewish ancestry". There's a big difference between those two.

I fully agree there is a distinction between "Hitler was a Jew" and "Hitler had some Jewish ancestry". I just feel that "Jewish" can be used for either of those statements, whereas you feel that "Jewish" can only mean the first.

I guess the question is whether "Jewish" applies to any sort of biological heritage (i.e. "racial group"), or if it is purely a social construct like a political party.

In which case, Jews for Jesus would be like "Republicans for Obama". ;)

Malthus

05-16-2012 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Irishman
(Post 15067694)

I fully agree there is a distinction between "Hitler was a Jew" and "Hitler had some Jewish ancestry". I just feel that "Jewish" can be used for either of those statements, whereas you feel that "Jewish" can only mean the first.

I guess the question is whether "Jewish" applies to any sort of biological heritage (i.e. "racial group"), or if it is purely a social construct like a political party.

In which case, Jews for Jesus would be like "Republicans for Obama". ;)

I don't think being Jewish has much to do with biology - as posted above, there are Jews who have white skin (the majority) and there are Jews who have black skin, and through the ME Jews of every shade between.

Within Europe itself, there are groups of Jews who have been genetically isolated for a long time, hence a host of genetic diseases to which Jews of those backgrounds are more prone.

Judaism is one of those very odd things in the modern West - a "tribal" identity, rather than a racial one. The obvious difference is that one can choose (or be chosen) to become a member of a tribe by conversion (though it is not really encouraged), and you can choose to leave it - unlike a racial grouping, which, although it is every bit as much a social construct as a tribal grouping, tends to be much less a matter of individual choice - it is imposed by the society in which the individual finds oneself. Hence, if I'm Obama and I live in the US, I'm "Black" whether I want to be or not.

Why is this important? Because what the Nazis did was create a "racial" category of Judaism, with their own criteria, and impose it on everyone under their rule - meaning many who were *not* Jewish, but who had Jewish ancestors, ended up in the camps. But such a categorization is alien to Judaism itself.

NUFCToon

05-17-2012 07:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malthus
(Post 15066753)

Meh. Certain Jewish groups have been genetically isolated - most notably, some Ashkenazim from Eastern Europe. But those Jews are no more a "race" than Newfoundlanders.

Jews cannot be a "race", because there are many Jewish groups who are quite obviously more different from other Jews than they are compared to the people around them.

For example, no-one would deny that Eastern European Ashkenazim generally have white skin ... but the Beta Israel (sometimes known as "Falashas" though the term is derogatory) are also "Jews" and they have Black skin. It's an odd sort of "race" in which some members of the "race" have white skin, and others black.

Jews can be and are a race, they are both a race and a religion, the vast majority of the world are Jews by race and not religious.

Judaism is a religion, nobody disputes that someone can change their religion and be considered a Jew 'religiously'.

However, one can be born Jewish and will remain Jewish for life, regardless of their religion.

Israel itself the 'Jewish homeland state' even states that 'Who is a Jew?' is someone with just one Jewish grandparent.

If your mother is Jewish, you are considered Jewish as well, regardless of what the offspring believes or thinks, it is still even if you insist on it "not" being a race, an ethno-religious group and more than just a religion, quit confusing Judaism with the Jewish people.

There is also Jewish ethnic groups... i.e Sephardi, Ashkenazi and so forth...genetic evidence shows all these have common origins... did you care to read the article I sent you?

"In the 1980s, the United States Supreme Court ruled that Jews are a race, at least for purposes of certain anti-discrimination laws. Their reasoning: at the time these laws were passed, people routinely spoke of the "Jewish race" or the "Italian race" as well as the "Negro race," so that is what the legislators intended to protect."

"DNA links prove Jews are a ‘race,' says genetics expert conjuring fear of Nazism and anti-Semitism, Jews recoil from the thought that Judaism might be a race, but medical geneticist Harry Ostrer insists the 'biological basis of Jewishness' cannot be ignored."

Read his book “Legacy: A Genetic History of the Jewish People" - if you deny genetic biological evidence... you are deluded.

There has been a long on going debate whether 'race' is biological and a social construct or just a social construct...there is evidence and its clear its biological yet lefties try and claim its not biological... more fool them.

But to the original OP question, Hitler did not have any Jewish ancestors it is just a rumour... the end?

Malthus

05-17-2012 09:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NUFCToon
(Post 15072975)

Jews can be and are a race, they are both a race and a religion, the vast majority of the world are Jews by race and not religious.

Judaism is a religion, nobody disputes that someone can change their religion and be considered a Jew 'religiously'.

However, one can be born Jewish and will remain Jewish for life, regardless of their religion.

Ah, no. If you convert to Christianity you are no longer a "Jew". You are out of the tribe.

Quote:

Israel itself the 'Jewish homeland state' even states that 'Who is a Jew?' is someone with just one Jewish grandparent.

You are confusing concepts. Israel has a "law of return" which was created as a deliberate reaction to the Nazi persecution of WW2. The idea was that anyone who would be likely to be persecuted because of Jewish ancestry can obtain automatic entry - because such folks were rejected (to their deaths) in WW2.

Quote:

If your mother is Jewish, you are considered Jewish as well, regardless of what the offspring believes or thinks, it is still even if you insist on it "not" being a race, an ethno-religious group and more than just a religion, quit confusing Judaism with the Jewish people.

I am not. As I've said, there is no problem being an atheist Jew.

You are confusing a tribal identity with a racial one. Judaism is not a "race".

Quote:

There is also Jewish ethnic groups... i.e Sephardi, Ashkenazi and so forth...genetic evidence shows all these have common origins... did you care to read the article I sent you?

I've read it and it is full of nonsense. How on earth can anyone plausably argue that Jews are a distinct "race" when this alleged "race" contains both Eastern Europeans with lily-white skin, and black Africans?

Quote:

"In the 1980s, the United States Supreme Court ruled that Jews are a race, at least for purposes of certain anti-discrimination laws. Their reasoning: at the time these laws were passed, people routinely spoke of the "Jewish race" or the "Italian race" as well as the "Negro race," so that is what the legislators intended to protect."

And this proves Jews are a "race"? No, it demonstrates that Jews were protected under handy anti-discrimination legislation.

"Italians" aren't a "race", either.

Quote:

"DNA links prove Jews are a ‘race,' says genetics expert conjuring fear of Nazism and anti-Semitism, Jews recoil from the thought that Judaism might be a race, but medical geneticist Harry Ostrer insists the 'biological basis of Jewishness' cannot be ignored."

Read his book “Legacy: A Genetic History of the Jewish People" - if you deny genetic biological evidence... you are deluded.

There has been a long on going debate whether 'race' is biological and a social construct or just a social construct...there is evidence and its clear its biological yet lefties try and claim its not biological... more fool them.

But to the original OP question, Hitler did not have any Jewish ancestors it is just a rumour... the end?

As I said, the author's book is full of nonsense, as anyone who can tell the visible difference between a Black African and a White European can attest. This argument is literally attempting to prove that black is white! :D

To maintain it, you either have to claim that the Falashas are "racially the same" as Eastern European Jews - an obvious silliness, if they are the same "race" then "race" has little meaning - or claim they aren't "real Jews", a "no true Scotsman" position.

Irishman

05-17-2012 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malthus
(Post 15073166)

Ah, no. If you convert to Christianity you are no longer a "Jew". You are out of the tribe.
[snip]

I am not. As I've said, there is no problem being an atheist Jew.

This is one source of confusion. One is allowed to reject the religious elements of Judaism and self-identify religiously by some other category and yet remain a "Jew" by one choice (atheism), and yet in a seemingly identical set of circumstances, one chooses to reject the religious elements of Judaism and self-identify by a different religious category (christian), and one is immediately no longer a "Jew". This is unexplained, and the distinction in cases does not appear to have any way to tell apart, yet the circumstances are treated differently. This is a giant WTF moment.

Is there any rational explanation for this distinction, any actual merit to this determination? I understand there is no requirement that Jews be consistent or rational, but it sure would help outsiders understand better if there were an explicable distinction being made.

I do have a guess, but it is pure speculation, and I would prefer to hear something "official".

Quote:

You are confusing a tribal identity with a racial one. Judaism is not a "race".

This is, perhaps, one of the biggest sources of confusion. It is not a concept that most of us have any experience with. More below.

Quote:

I've read it and it is full of nonsense. How on earth can anyone plausably argue that Jews are a distinct "race" when this alleged "race" contains both Eastern Europeans with lily-white skin, and black Africans?

[snip]

To maintain it, you either have to claim that the Falashas are "racially the same" as Eastern European Jews - an obvious silliness, if they are the same "race" then "race" has little meaning - or claim they aren't "real Jews", a "no true Scotsman" position.

Well, here is my attempt to make sense of the "race" angle. Judaism is a heritage passed on along family lines. It is passed within families, who also largely practice and encourage closed marriages, i.e. marrying within the community. Further, Judaism has family lineal ties back to thousands of years before christianity. This family lineage connection provides a strong case for "there is a genetic lineage element to being a Jew". I seem to recall genetic studies do bear this out.

However, Judaism also does allow for conversion, even though it does not seek it out nearly to the degree as some other religions. This has been different in the distant past. Also, while closed marriages are encouraged, there is some outbreeding that occurs. Add in the second class status of Jews in much of European history and their having to migrate/spread to avoid persecution, and these elements combine to create a diversification of the outward appearance of different groups within the whole.

So while there are distinct population groups in different locations that have distinct racial makeups, there is still a common heritage underlying the individual groups, that provides some common racial heritage.

Now just how much common heritage there really is, I do not know. I am merely connecting the dots of thought.

Now back to the point above about a "tribal" identity. I am trying to provide a framework of thought to help understand this better. The analogy I come up with is something like being an American. United States citizenship is largely passed along family lines, but it is not closed to just those biological lines. There is the ability to join the citizenship through immigration and naturalization. There is also the possibility of giving up citizenship through emigration, and taking on a different citizenship.

With this process, the identity as an American is largely passed along family lines, but is not biological. It can be opted out of or in to, with certain restrictions and methods. Furthermore, one can actually have multiple identities via dual citizenships. Though the US doesn't really encourage it, it can happen. Supposing one had dual citizenship, such as, for instance, dual US/Israeli* citizenship. One is not half American, half Israeli - one is simultaneously American and Israeli.

In other situations where both countries do not recognize dual citizenship, for one to take on the new non-US citizenship, one must give up US citizenship. Thus the incongruity between being a dual American/Israeli, but not a dual American/Canadian.

Is this analogy helpful? Does it capture the essence reasonably well? Can you offer any corrections?
-----
*Example not picked for any connection to Judaism, just an example of dual citizenship that can occur. IIRC an American can obtain Israeli citizenship without giving up US citizenship.

Malthus

05-17-2012 08:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Irishman
(Post 15074957)

This is one source of confusion. One is allowed to reject the religious elements of Judaism and self-identify religiously by some other category and yet remain a "Jew" by one choice (atheism), and yet in a seemingly identical set of circumstances, one chooses to reject the religious elements of Judaism and self-identify by a different religious category (christian), and one is immediately no longer a "Jew". This is unexplained, and the distinction in cases does not appear to have any way to tell apart, yet the circumstances are treated differently. This is a giant WTF moment.

Atheism is not the same as chosing another religious identity.

Though to be fair, the idea that 'if you convert to another religion you are out of the tribe' is not shared by all Jews. The most orthodox are of the opinion that you can't convert "out" of Judaism. All Jews however believe that you can convert "into" Judaism.

Quote:

Is there any rational explanation for this distinction, any actual merit to this determination? I understand there is no requirement that Jews be consistent or rational, but it sure would help outsiders understand better if there were an explicable distinction being made.

Sure. The distinction is that atheism isn't incompatible with Judaism. Judaism isn't a religion that actively requires belief, or inquires into belief. It is more focused on acts. Formally converting to a religion such as Christianity is an act incompatible with loyalty to Judaism.

Quote:

I do have a guess, but it is pure speculation, and I would prefer to hear something "official".

Unfortunately, there is nothing absolutely "official" in Judaism, as Judaism lacks any sort of central authority. What exists is the holy books and the accumulated commentaries and debates of learned rabbis over centuries (the Talmud). This sort of debate - over how to define Judaism - is the sort of thing that would warm a rabbi's heart: Judaism is made up of debates over things like that. ;)

Quote:

This is, perhaps, one of the biggest sources of confusion. It is not a concept that most of us have any experience with. More below.

There are two aspects of Judaism difficult to understand in our culture, which is so permiated with Christianity:

(1) That Judaism is a religion based on law and ritual, not faith. Individual Jews may have faith or they may not, but Judaism isn't based on it. For example, the great issues that other religions such as Christianity find of vital import - such as, is there an afterlife? - are of little significance in Judaism: some Jews think there is, some don't, and there is (amazing to Christians) no real definitive answer.

(2) That Judaism is at the same time a religion and a tribe. That's what we are talking about now.

Quote:

Well, here is my attempt to make sense of the "race" angle. Judaism is a heritage passed on along family lines. It is passed within families, who also largely practice and encourage closed marriages, i.e. marrying within the community. Further, Judaism has family lineal ties back to thousands of years before christianity. This family lineage connection provides a strong case for "there is a genetic lineage element to being a Jew". I seem to recall genetic studies do bear this out.

Not necessarily. For example, if you read the page on the falashas, genetic studies indicate that they are geneticly related to other Ethiopians and Yemenites.

There are indeed some "closed" communities - namely, Eastern European Ashkenazim. This relates more to the fact that they were segregated from the Christian community by longstanding hatred from the Christian community than anything else - for example, this "exlusivity" is *not* seen among Mizrai or Shephardim Jewish communities, who are much more "mixed" with their neighbours - and as stated, Falashas.

In short, it is a product of relations with the outside community, and really is specific to eastern europe.

Quote:

However, Judaism also does allow for conversion, even though it does not seek it out nearly to the degree as some other religions. This has been different in the distant past. Also, while closed marriages are encouraged, there is some outbreeding that occurs. Add in the second class status of Jews in much of European history and their having to migrate/spread to avoid persecution, and these elements combine to create a diversification of the outward appearance of different groups within the whole.

So while there are distinct population groups in different locations that have distinct racial makeups, there is still a common heritage underlying the individual groups, that provides some common racial heritage.

Now just how much common heritage there really is, I do not know. I am merely connecting the dots of thought.

It may be that there is some common ancestor, but that is far outweighed by the dilution with neighbours. Genetically, if you did not know who was claiming to be Jewish, you could not pick them out using a DNA analysis.

This doesn't much matter, because Judaism is a socially constructed identity.

Quote:

Now back to the point above about a "tribal" identity. I am trying to provide a framework of thought to help understand this better. The analogy I come up with is something like being an American. United States citizenship is largely passed along family lines, but it is not closed to just those biological lines. There is the ability to join the citizenship through immigration and naturalization. There is also the possibility of giving up citizenship through emigration, and taking on a different citizenship.

With this process, the identity as an American is largely passed along family lines, but is not biological. It can be opted out of or in to, with certain restrictions and methods. Furthermore, one can actually have multiple identities via dual citizenships. Though the US doesn't really encourage it, it can happen. Supposing one had dual citizenship, such as, for instance, dual US/Israeli* citizenship. One is not half American, half Israeli - one is simultaneously American and Israeli.

In other situations where both countries do not recognize dual citizenship, for one to take on the new non-US citizenship, one must give up US citizenship. Thus the incongruity between being a dual American/Israeli, but not a dual American/Canadian.

Is this analogy helpful? Does it capture the essence reasonably well? Can you offer any corrections?
-----
*Example not picked for any connection to Judaism, just an example of dual citizenship that can occur. IIRC an American can obtain Israeli citizenship without giving up US citizenship.

I used a similar analogy above ...

Way I'd put it is this.

In the OT, god allegedly tells Abraham that he will "make of him a great nation". That's how Jews look upon themselves, more or less - the "great nation" or "people" of the covenant of god with Abraham.

What is the cost of being a member of that "great nation"? It is keeping the terms covenant. Hence, the significance of ritual and law in Judaism.

Who is a member of that "great nation"? It is those who are born into it and do not break the covenant. Not believing in god doesn't break the covenant: a person can keep the terms for whatever reasons, not just because there existed a literal god. They can keep the terms, for example, because they are the ancestral terms of their "people". Hence, a tribal identity - one formed by custom and law (as opposed to genetics).

However, according to most Jews, the terms of the deal are you are not supposed to believe in other gods.

grude

05-17-2012 08:13 PM

A hate monger leading a secret life in opposition to their public persona? Why I never!

Evangelical pastor Ted Haggard described Thursday as "fundamentally true" an assertion that he engaged in an inappropriate relationship with a 20-year-old male volunteer in 2006.

The incident occurred when the two men were in bed together, Grant Haas said in a videotaped interview played on CNN's "Larry King Live."

"He pretty much asked me if it was OK if he masturbated in front of me or masturbated in the bed next to me," Haas said. "I told him no, it would make me really uncomfortable. But he grabbed a bottle of lotion and started masturbating."

NUFCToon

05-17-2012 11:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malthus
(Post 15073166)

Ah, no. If you convert to Christianity you are no longer a "Jew". You are out of the tribe.

No, you will still remain an ethnic Jew just not religiously Jewish.

Quote:

You are confusing concepts. Israel has a "law of return" which was created as a deliberate reaction to the Nazi persecution of WW2. The idea was that anyone who would be likely to be persecuted because of Jewish ancestry can obtain automatic entry - because such folks were rejected (to their deaths) in WW2.

:rolleyes:

Quote:

I am not. As I've said, there is no problem being an atheist Jew.

How can one be a Jew and an Atheist? You are contradicting yourself.

Quote:

You are confusing a tribal identity with a racial one. Judaism is not a "race".

Jews are a race, Judaism is a religion - you don't need to practice Judaism to be a Jew.

Quote:

I've read it and it is full of nonsense. How on earth can anyone plausably argue that Jews are a distinct "race" when this alleged "race" contains both Eastern Europeans with lily-white skin, and black Africans?

The Eastern Europeans would have been mixed Jews.

The black Africans are converts.

Quote:

And this proves Jews are a "race"? No, it demonstrates that Jews were protected under handy anti-discrimination legislation.

In denial?

Quote:

"Italians" aren't a "race", either.

They are a White European ethnic group, 'ethnicity' and 'race' can be termed as the same, historically they were seen as the same.

Quote:

As I said, the author's book is full of nonsense, as anyone who can tell the visible difference between a Black African and a White European can attest. This argument is literally attempting to prove that black is white! :D

The Blacks are not the genetic related Jews.

Quote:

To maintain it, you either have to claim that the Falashas are "racially the same" as Eastern European Jews - an obvious silliness, if they are the same "race" then "race" has little meaning - or claim they aren't "real Jews", a "no true Scotsman" position.

If you say so...

The leader of American Jewry in the 1930s, Rabbi Stephen F. Wise, said it succinctly in this dramatic statement, “Hitler was right in one thing. He calls the Jewish people a race and we are a race.”

Right up to the present day, there are many statements illustrating how Jewish leaders matter-of-factly view themselves not just as a religion, but as an identifiable race, genetically distinguishable from other peoples.

Nahum Goldman, one of the leading Jews of the 20th Century and former president of the World Zionist Organization, said it very bluntly:

…The Jews are divided into two categories, those who admit they belong to a race distinguished by a history thousands of years old, and those who don’t. The latter are open to the charge of dishonesty.

The former Israeli Prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, speaking to Jewish group in southern California said:

“If Israel had not come into existence after World War II then I am certain the Jewish race wouldn’t have survived…I stand before you and say you must strengthen your commitment to Israel.”

An editorial entitled “Some Other Race” in the New York weekly Forward (A very prestigious Jewish publication) urges Jews to list themselves on the U.S. Government census form as a race. It goes on to suggest:

“… On question eight [of the form, which asks about race], you might consider doing what more than one member of our redaktzia [editorial staff] has done: checking the box ‘some other race’ and writing in the word ‘Jew’.”

Charles Bronfman, a main sponsor of the $210 million “Birthright Israel,” an organization specifically committed to preventing intermarriage between Jews and Gentiles, expressed the need to preserve the Jewish genetic character as expressed in the Jewish DNA.

Bronfman is brother of Edgar Bronfman, Sr., president of the World Jewish Congress. He said, “…you’re losing a lot — losing the kind of feeling you have when you know [that] throughout the world there are people who somehow or other have the same kind of DNA that you have.”

Imagine for a moment if President George Bush would speak to a group of White college students and tell them how great it is for them know that others in the world share their White DNA, and that they should not lose it by intermarrying with other races. Bush could live to 100 years old and still never live down a remark like that!

During his campaign for President in 2000, Bush spoke before dozens of Jewish organizations and Synagogues that oppose intermarriage between Jews and non-Jews. The media only had praise for those appearances. In contrast, Bush faced universal criticism by the Jewish media by simply speaking at a conservative Christian university (Bob Jones University) that quietly opposes racial intermarriage. After the media unleashed a storm of criticism, Bush had to quickly apologize and then passionately condemn Bob Jones University for its position. Of course, within a few days, Bush was again speaking before many Jewish groups that stridently oppose intermarriage, yet no one in the media dared object to these appearances, or to even point out this blatant double standard.

Farmer Jane

05-17-2012 11:47 PM

Malthus, we've done this dance before. Aren't you tired?

:D

Malthus

05-18-2012 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Farmer Jane
(Post 15076021)

Malthus, we've done this dance before. Aren't you tired?

:D

Yeah, I'm starting to sense a certain ... motivation ... at work.* :D

NUFCToon, I am quite uninterested in debating the comparative rights and wrongs of Judaism and white supremacy. Obviously I do not consider the two to be in any way comparable. Many if not most minority cultures or religions prefer that people marry from within the group, but that does not make them all the same as white supremacists.

Does anyone know more about this claim? Can narrow down the identity intended? Refute the claim?

I think this is highly unlikely. As Ian Kershaw points out in his biography of Adolf Hitler, Jews were not allowed to settle in the part of Austria where the Hiedler/Huettler/Hitler family lived until much later (the mid-19th century, as I recall).

Irishman

05-18-2012 12:26 PM

Malthus, thank you for your replies. You are helping me understand some of those puzzling things that have never made sense to me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malthus
(Post 15075422)

Atheism is not the same as chosing another religious identity.

This seems preposterous on the face of it. However, reading the further descriptions, I guess I can see how losing faith in God is not an exclusionary factor.

Quote:

Unfortunately, there is nothing absolutely "official" in Judaism, as Judaism lacks any sort of central authority.

Yeah, I realize that, that's why I put it in scare quotes. What I meant was an insider's view, or an explanation from someone informed rather than just me guessing.

Quote:

(1) That Judaism is a religion based on law and ritual, not faith. Individual Jews may have faith or they may not, but Judaism isn't based on it. For example, the great issues that other religions such as Christianity find of vital import - such as, is there an afterlife? - are of little significance in Judaism: some Jews think there is, some don't, and there is (amazing to Christians) no real definitive answer.

This is particularly odd, that one can be a member of the religion without any belief in God or the afterlife. What is important is following the rules.

Quote:

(2) That Judaism is at the same time a religion and a tribe. That's what we are talking about now.

This part is easier to follow. There's a group with a cultural heritage, a pattern of rituals and practices that shows inclusion and group cohesion. This grouping is the "tribe". The practices and rituals are formalized through a structure of the religion. However, one can choose to follow the rituals and practices not because of a belief in the religious framework, but because of a commitment to tradition and heritage.

This is the kind of position that makes terms like "religion" and "atheist" and "Jew" all goofy.

Quote:

Not necessarily. For example, if you read the page on the falashas, genetic studies indicate that they are geneticly related to other Ethiopians and Yemenites.

Which is not incompatible with what I said. Elements of crossbreeding and conversion create a population of Jews that is somewhat separated from other populations, and thus takes on more of the characteristics of their local group.

But I certainly don't claim to be an expert on the genetic studies on Jewish lineage.

Quote:

It may be that there is some common ancestor, but that is far outweighed by the dilution with neighbours. Genetically, if you did not know who was claiming to be Jewish, you could not pick them out using a DNA analysis.

Okay then.

Quote:

I used a similar analogy above ...

Yeah, but I was searching for one that is easy for people to grasp and fits with their common experience. Talking through it helps me frame my own understanding.

Quote:

Who is a member of that "great nation"? It is those who are born into it and do not break the covenant. Not believing in god doesn't break the covenant: a person can keep the terms for whatever reasons, not just because there existed a literal god. They can keep the terms, for example, because they are the ancestral terms of their "people". Hence, a tribal identity - one formed by custom and law (as opposed to genetics).

However, according to most Jews, the terms of the deal are you are not supposed to believe in other gods.

This is along the lines I was speculating, but spelled out much better and more cohesively.

One other comment: the word "tribe" itself carries the suggestion of a racial lineage. Ergo, your use of that word does not negate the issues surrounding a racial lineage for Judaism.

No, one other comment: the word "ethnicity" does not mean what many of us think it means.

Quote:

Ethnicity refers to shared cultural practices, perspectives, and distinctions that set apart one group of people from another. That is, ethnicity is a shared cultural heritage. The most common characteristics distinguishing various ethnic groups are ancestry, a sense of history, language, religion, and forms of dress. Ethnic differences are not inherited; they are learned.

Underlining added. Many of us think of "ethnicity" as a term associated with a racial background, a term referring to biological heritage, not cultural heritage.

NUFCToon

05-19-2012 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malthus
(Post 15076795)

NUFCToon, I am quite uninterested in debating the comparative rights and wrongs of Judaism and white supremacy. Obviously I do not consider the two to be in any way comparable. Many if not most minority cultures or religions prefer that people marry from within the group, but that does not make them all the same as white supremacists.

Jews themselves admit they are a race, why are you disputing it?

Let's just say Jews are not a race, they are still an ethno-religious group so you can be ethnically Jewish or part Jewish and not religious.

Quote:

Originally Posted by terentii
(Post 15076965)

I think this is highly unlikely. As Ian Kershaw points out in his biography of Adolf Hitler, Jews were not allowed to settle in the part of Austria where the Hiedler/Huettler/Hitler family lived until much later (the mid-19th century, as I recall).

It's just a persistent unconfirmed rumour, I don't get why the tabloids want to keep trying to make claims he was part Jewish when it is evidently false and has no basis in facts.

Also...

A subsequent analysis of Frank's statement by Simon Wiesenthal disclosed that there was no evidence of any Jewish family named Frankenberger ever living in Graz. What is more, Jews had been driven out of Graz in the 15th century and had not been allowed to return until 1856, nearly twenty years after Hitler's grandfather had been born.

Hitler's grandmother's maiden name was Schickelgruber. There is considerable evidence that this family produced abnormal progeny. Examples are: one of Hitler's relatives through his mother's side committed suicide in 1920, another, Aloisha had been placed in an insane asylum, another was "feeble-minded," and yet another was retarded.

According to the article from which I am quoting this material:

"Hitler's real fear, then, was not that someone would discover that he has a Jewish grandfather, but that it would someday come to light that he carried a hereditary disposition toward mental illness and retardation."
You might ask your English teacher to go to a good library and see the following article:

"Hitler's Family Secret: A file recovered from the Nazi Archives tells of a Gestapo investigation into the Fuehrer's murky family history."
By: Ben S. Swearingen
Civilization: The Magazine of the Library of Congress Volume 2, Number 2, Arcg/April 1995, pp. 54-55

So no he wasn't in any way Jewish or had any Jewish ancestors.

The Hitler's DNA is also a hoax to claim he was half Jewish and half Black... it isn't exclusive to both people and is common in Europe, 9% Austria...

Farmer Jane

05-19-2012 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NUFCToon
(Post 15080936)

Jews themselves admit they are a race, why are you disputing it?

Uh, cite? And what do you mean by 'admit'? Were Jews previously in denial or something?

NUFCToon

05-19-2012 07:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Farmer Jane
(Post 15080947)

Uh, cite? And what do you mean by 'admit'? Were Jews previously in denial or something?

But of course anything that doesn't go someone's way on here or be cited will automatically be considered not a credible source, Jews are obviously more than a religion, they are even considered by Wikipedia to be ethno-religious... you don't have to be religious to be Jewish and you can be a Jew from birth.

Even Sigmund Freud - "Freud's family and ancestry were Jewish. Freud always considered himself a Jew even though he rejected Judaism and had a critical view of religion."

Farmer Jane

05-19-2012 07:20 PM

Um, so you pull two quotes from Jews...out of 13 million. Well, 13 million is only the number of living Jews, so that's not even accounting for most of Jews in history.

And most Jews that I know are uncomfortable with the term 'race' when describing their heritage. Jews aren't a race. You can become Jewish, but I can't go and decide to become a black person. I really thought that would've been covered in Humanities 101.

NUFCToon

05-19-2012 09:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Farmer Jane
(Post 15081344)

Um, so you pull two quotes from Jews...out of 13 million. Well, 13 million is only the number of living Jews, so that's not even accounting for most of Jews in history.

And most Jews that I know are uncomfortable with the term 'race' when describing their heritage. Jews aren't a race. You can become Jewish, but I can't go and decide to become a black person. I really thought that would've been covered in Humanities 101.

Nothing I will say will ever be 'enough', will it?

Let's look at the definition of 'Jew' okay?

Jew
noun /jo͞o/
Jews, plural

A member of the people and cultural community whose traditional religion is Judaism and who trace their origins through the ancient Hebrew people of Israel to Abraham

Web definitions

a person belonging to the worldwide group claiming descent from Jacob (or converted to it) and connected by cultural or religious ties
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

This article focuses on the etymology of the word Jew.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jew_(word)

The Jews (יְהוּדִים "Yehudim" IPA), also known as the Jewish people, are a nation and ethnoreligious group originating in the Israelites or Hebrews of the Ancient Near East. ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jew

(Jewed) The following is a list of ethnic slurs (ethnophaulisms) that are, or have been, used as insinuations or allegations about members of a given ethnicity or to refer to them in a derogatory (critical or disrespectful), pejorative (disapproving or contemptuous), or insulting manner in the ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewed

To bargain, to attempt to gain an unfair price in a business deal; to defraud
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/jew

An adherent of Judaism; A person who claims a cultural or ancestral connection to the Jewish people (see secular Jew); alternative capitalization of jew
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Jew

(Jewing) Part of the wattle on the lower beak.
desmoore.tripod.com/id29.html

(58. Jews) (2006) Mel Gibson's remake of Jaws blames the Jews for the shark attacks. The end. Critics found the movie to be highly offensive and the film was soon pulled from theaters after mediocre box office receipts.
mirror.uncyc.org/wiki/Worst_100_Remakes_of_All_Time

(Jews) (1) The name for the people Israel throughout the Rabbinic, Medieval, and Modern Periods. It evolved from the Greek term for someone who lives in Judea (see Judah), namely, Judean. ...
uwacadweb.uwyo.edu/religionet/er/judaism/jglossry.htm

(Jews) Mr. "Tough on everybody" made a jew joke once. While showing is "good" side (in a gay pink shirt and baby blue vest) and his "bad" side (wearing a jersey and a cap twisted to the side like a retard. Not threatening at all. ...
encyclopediaofstupid.com/stupid/index.php/Carlos_Mencia

(Jews) Originally, a Jew was a member of the state of Judah during the period of the division of Israel into two nations: Judah and Israel. It became a common reference from the 8th century B.C. Today it is used of adherents of the Jewish religion.http://www.spiritrestoration.org/The...Kingdom…

To dream of being in company with a Jew, signifies untiring ambition and an irrepressible longing after wealth and high position, which will be realized to a very small extent. To have transactions with a Jew, you will prosper legally in important affairs. ...http://www.brilliantdreams.com/dream...nary-j.…

Originally one of God's chosen people who followed the covenant given to Moses by God. In the Old Testament, the Jews are (1) citizens of Judah; (2) the postexilic people of Israel; or (3) the worshipers of Yahweh. ...http://www.pravoslavieto.com/docs/en..._orth_term.htm

A person whose mother was a Jew or who has converted to Judaism. According to the Reform movement, a person whose father is a Jew is also a Jew. ...www.jewfaq.org/glossary.htm

A member of the tribe of Judah; an Israelite; a member of a nation existing in Palestine from the sixth century BCE to the first century CE; a person belonging to a continuation, through descent or conversion, of the ancient Jewish people; one whose religion is Judaism.http://www.cmp-cpm.forces.gc.ca/pub/...ossair-eng.asp

Beneficiary of Judaism; tribalist who is dishonest about his tribalism
swordofelysium.wordpress.com/glossary/

Means 'Praiser' -- comes from 'Judah. Today means those from tribes of Judah, Levi, Benjamin and others who returned to Israel following Babylonian captivity.www.lightofmashiach.org/glossary.html

Jews rarely go with non-Jews, Jews rarely consider the people who convert to be a "real" Jew, surely someone can convert and be religiously Jewish but their will not be an ethnic Jew of the Semitic race.

This is not the same as the 'DNA results' accordingly of Hitler who allegedly carries E1b1b which is common all over Europe but silly journalists have said that because a subclade E1b1b1 which is more common over North Africans and Jews than Europeans he's automatically Jewish and African ethnically, rubbish! In fact the samples were from napkins and it's not exclusive so it's not definitive, get it?

Farmer Jane

05-19-2012 09:19 PM

For about fifteen seconds, I thought you finally had the difference between "race" and "ethnicity" down. Nope. Guess not.

NUFCToon

05-20-2012 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Farmer Jane
(Post 15081597)

For about fifteen seconds, I thought you finally had the difference between "race" and "ethnicity" down. Nope. Guess not.

"Before Weber, race and ethnicity were often seen as two aspects of the same thing."

Quit thinking Jews equals Judaism, it is both.

Stick to OP question - Hitler was not Jewish nor do the couple of years ago DNA results confirm he was Jewish and African, that is a media stirring propaganda journalist article.

E1b1b accordingly found is found all over Europe... it is 9% in Austria, Hitler's family were Austrian Germans and as far as we know there is no evidence any of his ancestors were Jewish - it is a mere urban legend myth unconfirmed rumour that is persistent still years and years after his death.

Farmer Jane

05-20-2012 11:29 AM

Jew does equal Judaism.

It just doesn't equal 'observant'.

Chronos

05-20-2012 11:59 AM

Quote:

Quoth qazwart:

If everyone who was matrilineally descended from a Jew was actually Jewish, there would be a lot more than the 12 or so million Jews around today.

Not necessarily. If Jewish women reproduce at the same rate as humans on average, then matrilineal identification would lead to the Jews making up an approximately constant proportion of the human population. You'll see slight random fluctuations, of course, but those can go up or down. If anything, 12 million is probably more than you'd expect from matrilineal identification.

As for the "Jewish as an ethnicity" question, I present a set of hypotheticals. First, suppose we have a fellow named Patrick O'Brian. His first language is Irish Gaelic. His favorite food is colcannon, the way his grandmother used to make it. His favorite song is "The Minstrel Boy", which he heard a lot growing up. Based on what I've told you, what would you say Patrick's ethnicity is? Would you have any hesitation in saying that he's Irish?

Now, suppose we have a different fellow. His name is David Cohen. His first language is Yiddish. His favorite food is gefilte fish, the way his grandmother used to make it. His favorite song is "Hava Nagila", which he heard a lot growing up. Based on what I've told you, what would you say David's ethnicity is? And what if I then told you that he attends mass every Sunday? What ethnicity would you say he is, now?

NUFCToon

05-20-2012 04:46 PM

Hitler religiously was not a Jew, he was a self-devoted Catholic.

But let's go by ancestry, there is no doubting Johann Georg was his grandfather, all the others are rumours and conspiracies.

The same as the DNA found and claims he is Jewish and African it is not conclusive and has not been scientifically verified.

E1b1b is common among all of Europe, one of the subclades which the journalists have printed as E1b1b1 is more common among Jews and Africans and have went 2 + 1 = 5

E1b1b is 9% found in Austria so it is still common... it is only going by their results from a napkin and a grand nephew (nephews are not direct descendants) so it's nothing but a hoax article.

"In 2010, the British paper The Daily Telegraph reported that a study had been conducted in which saliva samples were collected from 39 of Hitler's known relatives to test their DNA origins and found, though inconclusively, that Hitler may have Jewish origins. The paper reported: "A chromosome called Haplogroup E1b1b1 which showed up in [the Hitler] samples is rare in Western Europe and is most commonly found in the Berbers of Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia, as well as among Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews ... Haplogroup E1b1b1, which accounts for approximately 18 to 20 per cent of Ashkenazi and 8.6 per cent to 30 per cent of Sephardic Y-chromosomes, appears to be one of the major founding lineages of the Jewish population." Again, this study, though scientific by nature, is inconclusive."

So was it E1b1b or E1b1b1 their found?

According to the Daily Mail article it says "The magazine says the DNA was tested under stringent laboratory conditions to obtain the results."

Yet... the same day this was posted... the original article from Knack says "Knack is a weekly Belgian news-magazine published by the Roularta Media Group. The results of the study are inconclusive until further verification by a scientific source."

Despite the claims, Hitler was not Jewish.

Zarkov

05-20-2012 05:26 PM

Hitler was an Austrian atheist whose only humanity exists by defining Human as a sequence of DNA.

cmyk

05-20-2012 07:43 PM

Perhaps there's some quantum state that allows one to be simultaneously Jewish and non-Jewish.

Maybe it also had something to do with Schrödinger fleeing Germany when he did. He wasn't Jewish, yet ironically, Heisenberg certainly was and Himmler, begrudgingly, let him stick around.

Weird. One did what you'd expect the other to do.

Zarkov

05-20-2012 10:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmyk
(Post 15083916)

Perhaps there's some quantum state that allows one to be simultaneously Jewish and non-Jewish.

Maybe it also had something to do with Schrödinger fleeing Germany when he did. He wasn't Jewish, yet ironically, Heisenberg certainly was and Himmler, begrudgingly, let him stick around.

Weird. One did what you'd expect the other to do.

The "Many Worlds" or "M" theory has no appeal to me. That mankind is only aware of 5% of the "observable" Universe affords me more than enough doubt that the Universe requires any additional Universe's simply to accomidate quantum mechanics, which still cannot be squared with general relativity. We humans have a long way to go before 11 dimensions need be used to explain uncertainty, let alone the arrow of time, and other such philosophical questions as to whether time even exists.

Suffice it to say that it's a good thing Einstein left Germany, and Heisenburg, the genius that he was, in the end was a traitor to humanity, Jewish or not. Sadly there are many Jews today that somehow relate "liberal" as an excuse to lambaste Israel, especially American and European Jews. The vast majority of Jews in Israel understand the nature of what an existential threat is.

I agree with you. It is strange the way things work out, when the victim becomes the victimized and petrodollars buys elitist influence among the "enlightened" people ( and especially higher education institutions). Remember, Germany in 1930 was thought to be the most enlightened Nation in the Western World. Yes, truly ... watching reality unfold is more surprising than any fictional story, no matter how artfully created.

gamerunknown

05-21-2012 04:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zarkov

The vast majority of Jews in Israel understand the nature of what an existential threat is.

Yes, when the state is under threat, we must ignore international law to protect it.